Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorSokhi, Ranjeet
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-17T15:58:51Z
dc.date.available2017-08-17T15:58:51Z
dc.date.issued2017-01-01
dc.identifier.citationSokhi , R 2017 , ' Evaluation of an urban modelling system against three measurement campaigns in London and Birmingham ' , Atmospheric Pollution Research , vol. 8 , no. 1 , pp. 38-55 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2016.07.004
dc.identifier.issn1309-1042
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0001-9785-1781/work/104213780
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2299/19236
dc.descriptionCopyright © 2016 Turkish National Committee for Air Pollution Research and Control. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
dc.description.abstractThe results of three measurement campaigns are presented in this study. The campaigns have been undertaken at an urban roadside site in London, for more than a year and three months in 2003e2004 and for a year in 2008, and at an urban background site in Birmingham, U.K, for about four months in 2002. The concentrations of PM2.5, PM10, NOx and NO2 were predicted using the roadside dispersion model CAR-FMI, combined with a national U.K. emission model, a meteorological pre-processor, and measured values at urban background stations. The agreement of the predicted and measured hourly and daily time-series has been assessed statistically for all of the campaigns and pollutants. For instance, the Indices of Agreement (IA) in all the campaigns ranged from 0.68 to 0.78, 0.87, from 0.70 to 0.80, and from 0.61 to 0.83 for PM2.5, PM10, NOx and NO2, respectively. However, in case of the campaigns in London, both the PM fractions and the nitrogen oxide concentrations were under-predicted. The model performance in terms of atmospheric stability, wind speeds and other factors was analysed, and reasons for the disagreement of predictions and measurements have been discussed. It is useful to consider the model performance statistics for several measurement campaigns simultaneously as some of the results were found to be specific only to one or two campaigns. The spatial concentration distribution of NOx in London for 2008 has also been presented.en
dc.format.extent19
dc.format.extent5366617
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofAtmospheric Pollution Research
dc.subjecturban pollution
dc.subjectmodel evaluation
dc.subjectPM2.5
dc.subjectNO2
dc.subjectCAR-FMI
dc.titleEvaluation of an urban modelling system against three measurement campaigns in London and Birminghamen
dc.contributor.institutionSchool of Physics, Astronomy and Mathematics
dc.contributor.institutionCentre for Atmospheric and Climate Physics Research
dc.contributor.institutionAtmospheric Dynamics & Air Quality
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1016/j.apr.2016.07.004
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
herts.preservation.rarelyaccessedtrue


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record